I don’t get either Scott or Angus’ positions. Cox has no right to appear in a newspaper – no proprietor is obliged to print his words. If they print them, that’s because they wanted to, and if they want to and do so, they deserve all the blame they get.

In a Fairfax paper there is generally a left wing fuddy-duddy or two employed to balance the field.

You're right. But why do right-wing fuddy duddies seem to be taken a lot more seriously than left-wing fuddy duddies? John Minto had a regular column on the Fairfax web not too long ago, and far from giving him a podium, it largely preached to the choir. Chris Trotter is slightly better, but only just.

Ye gods. It looks as if the fundies are transitioning from targeting LGBTs as their preferred object of the Three Minutes Hate session to Muslims, with conspiratorial sentiments that similarly attribute the Downfall of Western Civilisation to them. I recommend Martha Nussbaum, the excellent US philosopher, as a corrective to these diatribes.

But it’s not fucking subtle at all – if anyone wants to equate all Catholics of Irish descent with the IRA I’ll have some words to share. They’ll be short, sharp and not fit for company, but that’s really not my problem. :)

With the appointment of Don Brash yes-man Richard Long (the long-time Dom editor, not the newscaster) to the TVNZ board, it’s quite plausible Paul Henry will be returning to our screens.

I’m going to regret asking this, but would you care to show your working for that conclusion, Red? It's actually a non-trivial allegation you're making there, so at least make an argument instead of an assertion.

With the appointment of Don Brash yes-man Richard Long (the long-time Dom editor, not the newscaster) to the TVNZ board, it’s quite plausible Paul Henry will be returning to our screens.

I’m going to regret asking this, but would you care to show your working for that conclusion, Red? It’s actually a non-trivial allegation you’re making there, so at least make an argument instead of an assertion.

Long is joining the board, Henry is in negotiations to to return to a hosting role. I don't think the two things are connected.

But it’s not fucking subtle at all – if anyone wants to equate all Catholics of Irish descent with the IRA I’ll have some words to share.

Of course you are right, and the IRA - Catholics comparison is a useful illustration of people conflating political and religious motives and then ascribing them to the one they dislike the most. Thus anything the IRA does (or did) is becuse they are Catholics and anything the Taliban does is because they are Muslims. It's easier that way.

FWIW, the SMH are describing the failure of Henry's show largely as, my words, a production error saying of Henry:

…it was worryingly off-brand for Ten, a network which has always prided itself on being inventive, original and never faltering in its clear focus on its younger audience. In contrast, Breakfast was predictable, derivative and – with a cranky, 52-year-old front and centre – seemingly pitched at an older, conservative audience which was never, and is still not, part of Tens's heartland.

The difficulty is separating the first part from the second part. It isn’t muslims that are a problem it’s extremists, it isn’t unions that are a problem it’s the extremists.

For a newspaper it is just a bit more complex to make that distinction. So when you get lazy op-ed writers they bundle all muslims up with the extremists. My brother-not-in-law was born in Iran and raised a muslim, he’s a hell of a nice guy whose been contributing to New Zealand for nearly two decades.

It’s just lazy to conflate my brother-not-in-law with some madman who shot a little girl in the head.

Actually it’s not just lazy it’s offensive.

And that’s where the Times needs to get it’s shit together. By publishing this drivel they have offended a huge number of people … not just muslim New Zealanders but the their friends and families and workmates.

The media has responsibilities. Do the editors of the Times really want to push for a society where my brother-not-in-law is harrased because of the actions of some extremists.? Does anyone want to actually live in a country like that?

Maybe but in spite of his redneckery, he’s not a stupid man. Perhaps he’ll return, suitably chastened and rehabilitated.

I’m inclined to draw a distinction between the context of Paul’s and Cox’s utterances though, in that a state broadcaster has more incumbent responsibility to uphold ethical standards than does a privately owned regional newspaper.